Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Peeling the Onion:
Critical Reflection within a Community of Practice:
Author One
Faculty of Education,
Mary Immaculate College,
University of Limerick, Ireland
Author Two
Fionnuala.Tynan,
Faculty of Education,
Mary Immaculate College,
University of Limerick, Ireland
Author Three
Anne O’Byrne
Faculty of Education,
Mary Immaculate College,
University of Limerick, Ireland
Author Four
Martin O’Connor
Faculty of Education,
Mary Immaculate College,
University of Limerick, Ireland
Abstract
Using the theories of critical reflection and community of practice, this paper
explores the processes, challenges and professional insights which resulted from a
semester-long initiative involving collaborative teaching by four lecturers where the
goal was to support the development of pre-service teachers’ understanding of parent-
professional partnership in the context of engaging with parents of children with
additional learning needs. The research methodology embraced a phenomenological
approach and the reflective process was documented through individual journaling
and community of practice reflection sessions involving the informants. The degree
of congruity and incongruity between espoused values and values-in-use was a
consistent theme during these reflective sessions. The research findings highlight the
commitment required, the stages involved and the challenges which emerged as the
researchers endeavoured to establish a safe space where personal backgrounds,
beliefs, assumptions, values, experiences and learnings were explored in order to
engage as a community of practice, focussing on learning and teaching for
transformation, within higher education.
Keywords
Collaborative Portfolio, Community of Practice, Reflection, Teacher Education,
Beliefs, Transformative Practice
1. Introduction
Reflective practice is seen as a central tenet of many teacher education programmes
around the world (Buschor and Kamm 2015; Horgan and Gardiner-Hyland, 2019;
Korthagen 2001; Postholm 2008). However, despite its widespread adoption, many
questions have been raised regarding the concept of reflection, the potential it offers
and the limitations to be overcome in the context of teacher education (Collin, Karsenti,
and Komis 2013; Mena-Marcos, Sanchez, and Tillema 2011). Acknowledging its
potential to promote professional learning and to integrate theory and practice, these
critiques highlight that there are still many challenges to surmount before reflection can
make an optimal contribution to teacher education. One of these challenges involves
the need for teacher educators to provide leadership and serve as role models who
themselves engage in reflective practice. This paper seeks to address this challenge by
reporting on a case study of collaborative reflection which was conducted over the
course of one semester involving four teacher educators who collaboratively developed
and taught a module which provides undergraduate students in initial teacher education
an opportunity to critically examine evidence-based research on parental-professional
partnerships in supporting the learning and wellbeing of children with additional
needs. In this module, opportunities are provided for students to explore, reflect and
critically evaluate their own values, beliefs and assumptions in terms of how they might
impact on partnerships with parents of children with additional needs and other
professionals. Becoming a reflective teacher is a central theme
throughout the module. This paper is based on the reflections of the four teacher
educators and who worked collaboratively to design, deliver and reflect on their
experiences and challenges as they attempted, through collaboration and critical
reflection, to transform their teaching and the learning experiences of their students.
2. Theoretical Framework
Critical reflection within a community of practice formed the theoretical framework for
this study. The essence of the concept of reflection in professional practice goes back
to the work of Dewey (1933, 1938) who referred to reflection as a form of thought
growing from a puzzlement felt in a situation and leading to a search for new
information. Dewey maintained that reflective thinking requires continuous evaluation
of beliefs, assumptions and hypotheses against existing data and against other plausible
interpretations of the data. Habermas (1971) sought to promote the emancipatory
function of knowledge and viewed reflection as having the potential to promote ideals
of empowerment and political emancipation where the use of critique and evaluation
promotes an outcome that is liberating in its effect. Van Manen (1977) drew on the
ideas of Habermas and proposed a hierarchy of reflective thought and practice of which
critical reflection was at the pinnacle. According to van Manen (1977), critical
reflection, embraces moral and ethical criteria and involves making judgements about
whether professional activity is equitable, just, and respectful of persons. In addition,
critical reflection locates any analysis of personal action within wider socio-historical
and politico-cultural contexts.
While reflective practice is well-researched (Carr & Kemmis, 1983; Manouchehri,
2002; Burnett & Lingam, 2007), there is a paucity of studies of collaborative reflection
involving university faculty (Bell & Mladenovic, 2013, Bentley-Williams,2017).
However, research highlights that it is difficult to uncover our own assumptions when
working as solitary individuals (Brookfield, 1998) and that the relationships between
individuals happen in situated, cultural activities (Engeström,1987; Leont’ev,1981;
Vygotsky,1978). It has also been shown that the process of participation and
collaboration with others in situated activities and practices promotes social and
cognitive development (Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1991). Hence, this research study
sought to close the gap between espoused theories about the benefits of collaborative
critical reflection and the challenges of working collaboratively in higher education.
3. Research Methodology
A phenomenological study concerns the process whereby individuals describe the
meaning of their lived experiences of a phenomenon (Creswell 2007, p. 57). The
phenomenon in question was how four teacher-educators experienced collaborative
teaching of a module on Parent-Professional Partnership with student teachers in their
third and fourth years of the Bachelor of Education Degree. The overarching research
question was as follows:
Through reflection, what can we uncover in ourselves and between ourselves
about the process of collaborative teaching that might be of value to the
community?
The embedded question was:
How can we make it psychologically safe to take risks and challenge each
other within the group?
Assuming a phenomenological perspective involves the “intersubjective construction of
social reality” (Vaccari, 2018, p. 49) and a sense of “co-beingness” (Caronia, 2011, p.
80). It acknowledges the processes of reflecting on experience to make sense of events
while reflecting on events to make sense of experience. To this end, the
researchers explored their backgrounds, values, beliefs, assumptions and experiences as
both learners and teachers. The researchers perceived lived experiences as conscious
experiences (van Manen, 1990) and sought to reduce ‘unconscious incompetence’ in
their teaching (Bassott, 2016) through group reflection.
As a means to developing a community of practice, the four lecturers engaged in the
development of a collaborative professional portfolio, using the ‘National Professional
Development Framework for All Staff Who Work in Higher Education’ (National
Forum, 2016). The framework is underpinned by a set of identified values: inclusivity,
authenticity, scholarship, learner-centredness and collaboration. These values were
adopted in setting common goals for the community of practice. The collaborative
portfolio set out to document the backgrounds, beliefs, experiences and learnings of the
four practitioners who sought to collaboratively design, deliver, assess, evaluate and
reflect on a module focussed on parent-professional partnership in the context of the
learning needs and wellbeing of children with additional needs. All four authors come
from different backgrounds (three have backgrounds in primary teaching and teacher
education, one is a health professional with a background in clinical psychology), have
different histories, aspirations, influences and inspirations but worked towards a
common vision for this module.
Data were gathered on the researchers’ lived experiences of teaching the module in a
number of ways. The data set consisted of:
minutes of planning meetings (MPM)
module documentation (MD)
minutes of review meetings (MRM)
individual reflective journal entries (RJ)
collective reflective exercises (CRE)
The researchers met twice weekly, after each lecture, for group reflection. Building trust
requires vulnerability (Lencioni, 2002), therefore, to be able to function successfully as
a ‘team’, ground rules were established to enable honest reflection. As this study
involved the personal reflections of four teacher-educators, it intruded on personal
thoughts, experiences and feelings that could be sensitive and/or intimate. However, it
was agreed that researchers could elect not to share aspects of their reflective writing
with the group and, where the data were being shared with a wider audience, each
participant had discretion over what personal information would be shared, thereby
reducing harm and risk.
Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis as it offers an
accessible and flexible approach to analysing qualitative data (p.77). This involved:
1. Familiarisation with the data: we immersed ourselves in the various data sets by
reading and rereading and noting ‘initial analytic observations’ (Braun and
Clarke, 2013, p.121).
2. Coding: we noted the emergence of initial codes through this analytic process
of initial coding.
3. Searching for themes: as ‘coherent and meaningful patterns’ (Braun and Clarke,
2013, p.121) emerged from the data, we organised these into themes.
4. Reviewing themes: this process involved the expansion and reduction of
emergent themes to tell the story of the data.
5. Defining and naming themes: here we conducted and wrote a detailed analysis
of each theme to determine its essence and constructed a meaningful name for
each one.
6. Writing up: this stage allowed us to weave the narrative with data extracts in
order to present a ‘coherent and persuasive story’ (Braun and Clarke, 2013, p.
121)
Findings and Discussion:
Beliefs and Personal Philosophy
One of the dominant themes which emerged from the data was the congruence that
existed in the espoused belief of the four lecturers regarding the intrinsic dignity of each
human being, whether child, parent, student teacher, or teacher educator. This is
probably not surprising as the group was formed arising from a shared passion on the
part of the researchers. There was a clear resonance between their ideals and guiding
beliefs about the value and purpose of education generally and, more particularly, about
their work as teacher educators.
My main inspiration comes from a belief in the dignity of each human person
and the right of each one of us to feel safe, belong, be cherished and live a ‘good’
life. (Anne, RJ)
I found resonance with my colleagues on this module in their awareness of and
interest in the person-hood of the student teachers. (Kathleen, RJ)
This core belief found expression in a desire to create opportunities for the student
teachers to experience dignity in their engagement with the researchers during the
module. It also led to the creation of spaces where the student teachers could explore
what concepts such as dignity might mean in the context of teaching
and interacting with children, particularly, those with additional needs.
Creating such learning spaces requires, I believe, a shared vision, a vision that
is firmly rooted in a belief in and profound respect for the dignity and potential
of each person. It requires leadership, trust, a passion for education and a belief
in the possible. It requires excellence, high standards, high expectations and
quality teaching. It requires teachers who are authentic facilitators of learning
with a vast array of inclusive instructional strategies, with a genuine concern for
the wellbeing and welfare of each student. (Anne, CRE)
Pedagogically, this belief was reflected in an approach to teaching which was dialogical
and social constructivist, where student teachers were facilitated to explore the layers,
textures and contradictions within their own beliefs and assumptions, and those of
others:
We all shared common cause in our desire to open up conversations about the
tacit, the hidden, the uncomfortable arena of beliefs, assumptions, perceptions
and language (Kathleen, CRE).
Relationships
The theme of relationships is divided into three subthemes: relationships with one
another, relationships with students and relationship with self. All relationships grew
and deepened over the course of the semester.
Relationships with one another
At the start of this module, the researchers had never worked together as a group, but
had each worked with at least one other person on the team. From the outset, they were
explicit about the need to model positive co-professional relationships, believing that
this is an important skill for student teachers in their future careers. They explored the
challenges which might need to be addressed in order to foster a successful
collaboration:
Perhaps it’s because each person comes to the table with different assumptions
about what it is they want to achieve and perhaps, in a group context, there are
also differing assumptions by others about what each group member wants to
achieve. (Martin, MPM)
As a basic principle of engagement, the researchers agreed to challenge each other’s
assumptions by developing the practice of asking each other questions in order to clarify
meanings in order to build shared understandings. One of the assumptions that emerged
for discussion early in the process involved differing perceptions regarding the role of
the teacher/lecturer:
It is often comfortable to find sanctuary behind a role or a title, to conform to
type – there is safety in that. But in that need for safety, there is also a
compromise in not engaging authentically, of not showing up fully. (Kathleen,
CRE)
To respect the relationship, it was acknowledged that there was a need to challenge each
other’s assumptions respectfully and sensitively:
There is the need for caution and care in realising that each person has their
own journey of learning and searching to travel, different from mine. (Martin,
CRE)
Three of the researchers found that having an ‘outsider’ practitioner working in the
group, required a greater level of precision in language use. This was noted by
Fionnuala in a personal reflection: “Martin challenged some of the basic educational
principles we talked about, those he was not familiar with, and this caused us to become
more explicit in our interactions and more reflective.” (Fionnuala, RJ)
The experience of teaching and working together, while challenging at times, was
highly valued by the researchers. They were aware that this form of collaboration
within a community of practice was a rare phenomenon in higher education and they
welcomed the new experiences it provided, particularly regarding collaborative
reflection on practice which they found both challenging and rewarding:
I have had the opportunity to practise what I already know and hone my craft
more. I have been challenged beyond belief and have had to step out of my
comfort zone. (Anne, CRE)
I now see a new way of engaging and a new way of being. At a professional
level, I have been inspired by the openness, dedication and commitment of my
colleagues, their capacity to share, their openness to learn. (Kathleen, CRE)
Relationship with self
An awareness of the relationship with self arose through the forming of connection and
relationship with others and was facilitated by the reflective exercises in which the
researchers engaged. “Through this module I’ve learned about myself as a teacher, a
teacher-educator, a colleague, a co-professional, a member of the disability
community” (Fionnuala, CRE). This collegiality also led Fionnuala developing a
greater sense of self-confidence: “I feel an equal and valued member of this community
of practice”. This sense of development was felt by all as noted by Anne: “My
colleagues have both affirmed and challenged me to grow as a person and a
professional” (Anne, CRE).
Relationship with students
The researchers shared a belief that a central aspect to a module on ‘Parent-Professional
Partnership’ should be working in partnership with the students. To this end, during the
first lecture students were asked to share their expectations for the module. This
highlighted a mismatch between the planned curriculum and what the students wanted.
We realised knew that we had to honour the student voice otherwise we would
only be paying lip-service to the concept of partnership. This led to RISE
(Responding to Initial Student Expectations) where each week the students were
given an input at the beginning of class on an area that they wanted to be
included in the module.” (Fionnuala, CRE)
In the mid-semester feedback, students commented on the value of this. Other activities
to honour the partnership with students included circle time activities at the end of
sessions, formal mid- and end-of-semester reviews, and group discussions. As
Fionnuala remarked, “students’ needs are changing from week to week and we are
doing our best to be adequately responsive” (Fionnuala, MRM).
Safety and Vulnerability
How to create a safe space where ideas could be challenged and teaching could be
observed and critiqued by peers, while personal and professional relationships were
maintained, emerged as a key theme during the process. The researchers were acutely
aware of the importance of this from the outset and established ground rules for mutual
engagement. These were founded on the principles of inherent respect for each group
member, active listening and a commitment to addressing each issue that emerged
between group members.
The theme of vulnerability was a constant throughout the research process. The issue
of what is meant by the term ‘vulnerability’ was explored. This exploration enabled
each researcher to reflect on and identify personal meanings they ascribed to the term
vulnerability. Examples included, ‘uncertainty’, ‘risk’, ‘emotional exposure’ ‘stepping
out of comfort zone’ ‘imposter syndrome’, ‘not being respected by other members of
the research team’; ‘a fear performing in front of colleagues’; ‘a fear not getting a
positive response from the students in the full view of peers’ and ‘a fear of letting go of
a need to be in control’.
An example of how vulnerability surfaced in practice is outlined in the following
excerpt from Fionnuala’s reflective journal which describes her experience of a
particular lecture which she felt did not go well:
My excitement and passion for my own research and the general lecture topic
clouded my judgement and I ended up speaking too much and providing far too
much information. I could see the boredom as students listened and looked as
slide after slide flashed across the screen referencing my own research and the
work of many other researchers. I was acutely aware of Anne and Martin sitting
there and rather than feeling supported, I felt exposed. I would much rather have
been doing this lecture with no peer to watch me get it so wrong. At the end of
the lecture Martin, Anne and I went back to the staffroom and I really didn’t
want to talk about it. I felt embarrassed and publicly humiliated. I felt I had
exposed myself and shown myself to be incompetent. I was so emotionally
fragile, completely vulnerable. I would have been happier to go home to bed
and cry for the evening. (Fionnuala, RJ)
As is evidenced by the below quotation, Fionnuala describes how her experience of
personal and professional vulnerability was respected and supported by the group. This,
and her experience of reflective practice to date, enabled her to acknowledge her
feelings of vulnerability.
The experience of the reflective practice to this point was critical for me. I
mentally wrestled with how honest I’d be and in that few seconds I knew I could
go for broke. We sat down with our teas and coffees and I said “That was a
disaster! I’m really embarrassed.” The looks told me I had made the right
decision in exposing my vulnerability. They both communicated understanding,
compassion and empathy in that moment. But rather than tell me I was wrong
and it was an excellent lecture they asked why I felt that way and I had to process
the lecture professionally as well as emotionally. They were kind and supportive
and agreed overall with my judgements but they softened the overly self-critical
language I was using and they agreed with the suggestions for improvement.
(Fionnuala, RJ)
As the community of practice became more established and a greater sense of trust and
safety was felt, the researchers were more open in acknowledging their feelings of
vulnerability.
For me personally this was quite difficult at times and I very vulnerable at times,
especially at the beginning. This led to much personal development. I needed to
use my inner voice to remind myself to be open, to take risks and to challenge
opinions. By doing this I also had to remind myself that when someone
challenged my views or disagreed with my opinion it was part of the process.
(Fionnuala, CRE)
The benefit of collaborative reflection became evident as the weeks went on. As
Brookfield (1998) reminds us, it is challenging in practice to ‘hunt’ one’s own
assumptions as a solitary endeavour as it is difficult not to engage one’s existing
assumptions in the process:
I couldn’t have found this resolution alone, but I can do it through the
collaborative paradigm of this module. Our reflections as a team mean I can be
questioned, challenged, gently probed to go deeper and I find I go there with
greater ease, with greater comfort and without a sense of trepidation. I have
learned to value the vulnerable and see it as my strength. It has influenced my
teaching in other areas and has prompted deep critical reflection in those areas
too. (Anne, CRE)
We invited one another to move towards the edge of our psychological comfort
zones, then to venture further, trusting in our shared commitment to both support
and challenge one another. My sense is that our respective decisions to venture
further has been deeply personal for each of us. For me it has been the road less
travelled, an unspoken but deeply felt search for belonging, connection and
inter-dependence. This has made all the difference! (Martin, CRE)
3. Conclusions and Future Work
This research sought to document and explore reflectively the opportunities,
challenges and ultimate learnings which resulted from the experiences of four teacher
educators who worked as a community of practice to design, deliver and critically
reflect on their experiences of engaging with students in the context of a module on
Parent Professional Partnership for children with additional needs.
The phenomenological approach to the analysis of the experiences and reflections of
the four participant researchers highlighted how differing individual expectations
(deriving from latent values, assumptions and beliefs) regarding roles, responsibilities
and relationships impacted on the process of creating and sustaining a community of
practice. The results highlight the personal and professional learnings that accrued
from the process in terms of exploration of beliefs and personal philosophies of
learning and teaching; deepening of relationships with each other, with students and
with self; and how to create safe spaces where participants can express and
acknowledge their vulnerability.
The findings reveal that the researchers experienced, in broad terms, the stages in the
Critical Reflection Process outlined by Larrivee (2000), notably the examination stage
(questioning whether a particular action, reaction, or interaction is achieving what is
desired); challenging current practice, beliefs and assumptions; desire for change,
struggle (often involving fear, doubt and vulnerability); and ultimately transformation
(involving changes in perspective and a shift in dominant ways of thinking). In the
case of the participants in this study, the process of transformation involved greater
feelings of self-efficacy and confidence.
However, there were many challenges and obstacles to be surmounted in
endeavouring to work as a community of practice using a critically reflective
paradigm within higher education. At a practical level, this process made
considerable demands on the participants in terms of their time. In addition to their
individual preparation and teaching on the module, the group engaged in six hours of
collaborative planning prior to the commencement of the module. Weekly two-hour
review and reflection meetings took place during each of the twelve weeks of the
semester. On completion of the module, the group devoted one full day to review,
process and evaluate the experience. In addition to this, two of the four lecturers
engaged in the module voluntarily as there was no system within the HEI to accredit
lecturing hours delivered collaboratively within a community of practice model such
as this.
Finally, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of this study. This was a small-
scale research study and a larger sample could yield further insights, both confirming
and contrarian, into the findings of this research (Bloomberg and Volpe, 2016).
Furthermore, this study explored the views of four teacher educators over one semester.
A longer study could yield further insights into the potential of critical reflection within
a community of practice to change the perspectives, beliefs, assumptions and
pedagogies of higher education faculty.
References
Bassot, B. (2016). The Reflective Journal. New York: Palgrave.
Bell, A. & Mladenovic, R. (2013). How tutors understand and engage with reflective
practices. Reflective Practice, 14(1), 1-11. doi:10.1080/14623943.2012.732949
Bentley-Williams, R. (2017). Engaging university casual tutors in collaborative
reflection for improving student learning outcomes. Reflective Practice, 18(4), 540-
553. doi:10.1080/14623943.2017.1323732
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2013) Teaching thematic analysis. The Psychologist, 26(2),
120-123.
Brookfield, S., 1998. Critically reflective practice. Journal of Continuing Education in
the Health Professions, 18(4), pp.197-205.
Buschor, C. B. & Kamm, E. (2015). Supporting student teachers’ reflective attitude
and research-oriented stance. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 14(3),
231-245. doi:10.1007/s10671-015-9186-z
Caronia, L.(2011) Fenomenologia dell’educazione: intenzionalità,
cultura e conoscenza in pedagogia. Milan: F. Angeli.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1983). Becoming Critical: knowing through action
research. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Collin, S., Karsenti, T., & Komis, V. (2013). Reflective practice in initial teacher
training: Critiques and perspectives. Reflective Practice, 14(1), 104-117.
doi:10.1080/14623943.2012.732935
Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective
Thinking to the Educative Process. Boston: D.C. Heath.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-
Konsultit Oy.
Habermas, J. (1971) Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon press.
Horgan, K., & Gardiner-Hyland, F. (2019). Irish student teachers’ beliefs about self,
learning and teaching: A longitudinal study. European Journal of Teacher
Education, 42(2), 151-174. doi:10.1080/02619768.2019.1576625
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2001). Changing our view of educational change. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 17(2), 263.
Larrivee, B. (2000). Creating caring learning communities. Contemporary
Education, 71(2), 18.
Lencioni, P. (2002). The Five Dysfunctions of a Team – A Leadership Fable.
Retrieved from https://www.governmentresource.com/The_Five_Dysfunctio
ns_of_a_Team.pdf
Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of the mind. Moscow, Russia:
Progress Publishers
Manouchehri, A. (2002). Developing teaching knowledge through peer
discourse. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(6), 715-737. doi:10.1016/S0742-
051X(02)00030-6
Marcos, J. M., Sanchez, E., & Tillema, H. H. (2011). Promoting teacher reflection:
What is said to be done. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(1), 21-36.
doi:10.1080/02607476.2011.538269
National Forum (2016). National professional development framework for all staff
who teach in higher education. Dublin: National Forum.
Postholm, M. B. (2008). Teachers developing practice: Reflection as key
activity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1717-1728.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.02.024
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Vaccari, M. (2018). Agency in language: Lessons from (and for) a phenomenological
approach to education, Ricerche di Pedagogia e Didattica - Journal of Theories and
Research in Education, 13(2), 49-73.
Van Manen, J. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy. London, Canada: The University of Western Ontario.
Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical.
Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated
action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
